+++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/11/15 07:50 -0600]:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:15:54AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
On 11/10/2015, 05:45 AM, Jessica Yu wrote:
> Intialize the list of relocation sections in the sample
> klp_object (even if the list will be empty in this case).
> Also mark module as a livepatch module so that the module
> loader can appropriately initialize it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <j...@redhat.com>
> ---
> samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c
b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c
> index fb8c861..2ef9345 100644
> --- a/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c
> +++ b/samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c
> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ static struct klp_object objs[] = {
> {
> /* name being NULL means vmlinux */
> .funcs = funcs,
> + .reloc_secs = LIST_HEAD_INIT(objs[0].reloc_secs)
And I see now. This is not the best place for it though. I would put
INIT_LIST_HEAD in the core code instead.
Maybe the reloc_secs list should instead be an array of klp_reloc_sec
structs, with the last entry being 0, similar to how we do other "lists"
in the klp interface (e.g., klp_patch.objs, klp_object.funcs).
Yeah, I admit the asymmetry is a bit awkward. Plus we can add in a
klp_for_each_reloc_sec to keep the api consistent. I'll go ahead and
change this to follow the existing klp "list" format.
Jessica
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
